Some considerations before the clinical application of the novel anatomical plate for oblique lumbar interbody fusion.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Huang W
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10061467 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Some considerations before the clinical application of the novel anatomical plate for oblique lumbar interbody fusion.
Huang Weibo W Wang Hongli H Ma Xiaosheng X Jiang Jianyuan J
Annals of translational medicine 20230309 5
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10061469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To provide applied anatomical evidence of the preoperative assessment of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), the anatomical parameters of the OLIF operative window were observed through computed tomography angiography (CTA). We selected imaging data from 60 adults (30 males, 30 females) who underwent abdominal CTA and T12-S1 vertebral computed tomography (CT) with three-dimensional reconstruction. The OLIF operative windows at the L1-2, L2-3, L3-4, L4-5 and L5-S1 levels were as follows: the vascular window, bare window, psoas major window, ideal operative window, and actual operative window. Each level's actual operative window was statistically analyzed based on an actual operative window of <1 cm and ≥1 cm. The vascular window was largest at L4-5 (1.72 ± 0.58 cm). The bare window was largest at L5-S1 (1.59 ± 0.93 cm) and smallest at L3-4 (1.37 ± 0.51 cm). The psoas major window was largest at L3-4 (1.14 ± 0.35 cm) and smallest at L1-2 (0.41 ± 0.34 cm). The ideal operative window was largest at L4-5 (3.74 ± 0.36 cm) and smallest at L1-2 (3.23 ± 0.30 cm). The actual operative window was largest at L3-4, followed by L2-3, L4-5, L1-2, and L5-S1, which were 2.51 ± 0.56 cm, 2.28 ± 0.54 cm, 2.01 ± 0.74 cm, 1.80 ± 0.45 cm and 1.59 ± 0.93 cm, respectively (P = 0.000), and the percentages of the actual surgical window were 69%, 66%, 53%, 56% and 43%, respectively. The actual surgical window was <1 cm in 2 cases at L1-2 (3.3%), 4 cases at L4-5 (6.7%), and 17 cases at L5-S1 (28.3%) (11 males and 6 females). The regional anatomy of each level related to OLIF has its own peculiarities, and not all levels are suitable for OLIF. Before OLIF surgery, surgeons should analyze the imaging anatomy and select the appropriate surgical procedures.
| S-EPMC5042505 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo build a model of an anatomical plate for oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery based on previous anatomical parameters and verify the biomechanical effect with finite element analysis.MethodsThe anatomical plate model was built with AutoCAD and Solidworks. Finite element models of the L2-3 and L4-5 segments were established with computed tomography images from a 46-year-old asymptomatic male individual. Six fixation technique models were created: (I) stand-alone (SA); (II) bilateral pedicle screws (BPS); (III) lateral rod-screw (LRS); (IV) lateral rod-screw plus facet screw (LRSFS); (V) two-screw lateral plate (TSLP); (VI) anatomical plate. The range of motion (ROM), the cage stress, and the instrument stress were calculated under different motion states.ResultsIn the L2-3 and L4-5 segment models, except for a slightly higher maximum cage stress in the extension state of the TSLP model and the right bending and rotation states of the BPS model, the maximum cage stress in each model was smaller than that of the SA model. In the L2-3 and L4-5 segments, each internal fixation limited the ROM in each motion state. The anatomical plate was more effective in reducing the maximum cage stress and vertebral ROM than the two-screw plate. Three-dimensional finite element analysis did not find a higher risk of construct failure for the anatomical plate model compared with the BPS internal fixation model.ConclusionsAnatomical plates can be considered as supplementary fixations using a single incision and position to improve the stability and rigidity of the construction and reduce the risk of complications.
| S-EPMC9469141 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLLIF) is a novel operation for fusions of the lumbar spine from T12-S1. In OLLIF, the disk is approached from an oblique lateral angle guided by electrophysiological monitoring and biplanar fluoroscopy; the disk space is accessed through Kambin's triangle. We present perioperative, clinical, patient-reported and radiological outcomes from a series of 303 OLLIF procedures on 568 levels performed by the same surgeon. For a single-level OLLIF, mean surgery time was 56.6 ± 37.7 minutes, with a blood loss of 42.2 ± 31.1 mL, fluoroscopy time of 198.8 ± 87.2 seconds and a hospital stay of 2.2 ± 1.7 days. At the one-year follow-up, 10-point pain scale scores improved from 8.6 ± 1.3 to 4.1 ± 3.0 (p < 0.001). Total Oswestry disability index score improved from 56.6% ± 15.3% to 38.6% ± 21.4% (p < 0.001). At the one-year follow-up, 15 (5%) patients had mild nerve root irritation defined as sensory symptoms and motor weakness better than 4/5. Only one patient had neuropraxia due to weakness (3/5). There was one case (0.3%) of superficial wound infection and one case of bleeding into the psoas major. Reoperation within one year was performed for 14 (4.7%) patients. Interbody fusion was achieved in 98.7% of levels. While OLLIF has previously been described, this study is the first to present clinical, patient-reported, and radiological outcomes of OLLIF. Review of the literature shows that OLLIF produces perioperative outcomes, complication rates, and fusion rates that compare favorably with similar procedures. We establish that OLLIF is a safe, efficient and efficacious procedure for fusions of the lumbar spine.
| S-EPMC6453614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive technique performed through the antero-oblique trajectory to address a wide range of lumbar pathologies. However, it can lead to complications. We reviewed the results of OLIF and discussed the effective methods to avoid such complications.MethodsSeventy-nine consecutive patients who underwent OLIF between May 2016 and July 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into three groups: stand-alone, posterior, and lateral fixation, according to whether they were followed up with auxiliary internal fixation as well as the fixation methods. Preoperative and last follow-up visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were used to assess the improvement in the lower back and leg pain as well as neurological conditions. We analyzed intervertebral disc height (DH), segmental lumbar lordotic angle (SLL), lumbar lordotic angle (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, and the cross-section area (CSA) on axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) image in different groups. Complications, including thigh symptoms, cage subsidence, neurological injury, and vascular injury, were also noted.ResultsSeventy-nine patients were followed up postoperatively for 23.2±11.5 (range, 12-48) months. Forty-eight (61%) patients underwent stand-alone surgery (without fixation), 15 (19%) patients underwent supplemental percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (posterior fixation), and 16 (20%) patients underwent lateral vertebral instrumentation (lateral fixation). In all three groups, the VAS score and the ODI score had significantly decreased at the final follow-up compared to pre-operation. The DH, SLL, LL, CSA, PT, and PI-LL mismatch had also improved by final follow-up. The most common approach-related complication was thigh symptoms. Of the 79 patients, ipsilateral transient psoas paresis occurred in 9 (11.4%), ipsilateral transient quadriceps weakness in 2 (2.5%), and groin/thigh numbness and pain in 17 (21.5%). Cage subsidence occurred in 8 (10.1%) patients, including five cases of grade 0, one of grade I, and two of grade II. Three (3.8%) patients in this study had a vascular injury.ConclusionsOLIF is a minimally invasive and effective technique for dealing with degenerative lumbar diseases. However, it should also be noted that this approach carries risks of complications.
| S-EPMC7859744 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims to perform a meta-analysis that integrates multiple literature sources to evaluate the clinical efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for treating lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD).MethodsA systematic search was conducted across various databases, including CNKI, VIP, WANFANG DATA, SinoMed, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, for clinical comparative studies on OLIF and MIS-TLIF for treating LDD, covering the time frame from the inception of the databases to September 2024. Following PRISMA guidelines, studies were screened, assessed, and data were extracted rigorously. Indicators extracted included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), disc height (DH), segmental lordotic angle (SLA), lumbar lordosis angle (LLA), postoperative JOA scores, patient satisfaction, complication rates, and fusion rates. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software.ResultsA total of 24 studies were included, comprising 11 randomized controlled trials and 13 retrospective cohort studies. The total population consisted of 1785 patients, with 898 in the OLIF group and 887 in the MIS-TLIF group. The meta-analysis indicated that, compared to the MIS-TLIF group, the OLIF group exhibited significantly lower intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, improved postoperative DH, shorter operative time, reduced postoperative VAS scores, lower postoperative ODI scores, and improved postoperative SLA and LLA. No significant differences were observed between the groups in postoperative JOA scores, fusion rates, complication rates, or patient satisfaction. The OLIF group exhibited advantages such as lower blood loss, shorter hospital stays, higher postoperative fusion rates, and improved recovery of disc and foraminal heights.ConclusionCompared to MIS-TLIF, OLIF is associated with a shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss, potentially leading to better relief of leg pain, restoration of DH, and prevention of subsidence. These findings offer valuable insights for clinical practice.
| S-EPMC11684309 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/Objectives: Various surgical approaches have been proposed for treating adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar fusion. However, studies using oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) to treat ASD are lacking. The current study assessed the postoperative outcomes of single-level OLIF for ASD, comparing the results with those for patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Methods: Patients who underwent single-level OLIF or TLIF for lumbar ASD were retrospectively included. Clinical outcomes, that is, the results of assessments using the Euroqol 5-Dimension quality of life scale (EQ-5D), the Oswestry Disability Index, and the visual analog scale, were evaluated. Radiologic parameters, including disc height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), segmental coronal angle (SCA), lumbar lordosis, and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, were also assessed. Results: A total of 65 patients were enrolled: 32 in the OLIF group and 33 in the TLIF group. The median follow-up time was 24.0 months in both groups. The clinical outcomes and radiologic parameters significantly improved in both groups postoperatively. According to intergroup comparisons, the OLIF group had significantly less blood loss and superior improvement in radiologic parameters (DH, SL, and SCA) whereas the TLIF group had significantly shorter operation times. For the OLIF patients who did not undergo posterior decompression, the operation time was similar to that of the TLIF group, but the surgical blood loss and length of hospital stay were significantly reduced compared with the TLIF group. Conclusions: Compared with TLIF, OLIF provides similar clinical outcomes, leads to less surgical blood loss, and has superior radiologic parameters; however, the operation time is significantly longer. OLIF without posterior decompression may be a superior option to TLIF for certain patients.
| S-EPMC11476864 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) are widely used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. In the present study, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of these two procedures.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed, and the quality of retrieved studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Clinical outcomes, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, improvement in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) effectiveness rate and complications, in addition to radiographic outcomes, including restoration of disc height, disc angle, overall lumbar lordosis, fusion rate and subsidence, were extracted and input into a fixed or random effect model to compare the efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF.ResultsSeven qualified studies were included. Clinically, OLIF resulted in less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation time than MIS-TLIF. Improvement of VAS for leg pain was more obvious in the OLIF group (P < 0.0001), whereas improvement of VAS for back pain (P = 0.08) and ODI (P = 0.98) as well as JOABPEQ effectiveness rate (P = 0.18) were similar in the two groups. Radiographically, OLIF was more effective in restoring disc height (P = 0.01) and equivalent in improving the disc angle (P = 0.18) and lumbar lordosis (P = 0.48) compared with MIS-TLIF. The fusion rate (P = 0.11) was similar in both groups, while the subsidence was more severe in the MIS-TLIF group (P < 0.00001).ConclusionsThe above evidence suggests that OLIF is associated with a shorter operation time (with supplementary fixation in the prone position) and less intraoperative blood loss than MIS-TLIF and can lead to better leg pain alleviation, disc height restoration and subsidence resistance. No differences regarding back pain relief, functional recovery, complications, disc angle restoration, lumbar lordosis restoration and fusion rate were found. However, due to the limited number of studies, our results should be confirmed with high-level studies to fully compare the therapeutic efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF.Trial registrationPROSPERO ID: CRD42020201903 .
| S-EPMC8449429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In the current surgical therapeutic regimen for the degenerative lumbar disease, both oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are gradually accepted. Thus, the objective of this study is to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of OLIF and LLIF for the degenerative lumbar disease. METHODS:We conducted an exhaustive literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to find the relevant studies about OLIF and LLIF for the degenerative lumbar disease. Random-effects model was performed to pool the outcomes about disc height (DH), fusion, operative blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stays, complications, visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI). RESULTS:56 studies were included in this study. The two groups of patients had similar changes in terms of DH, operative blood loss, operative time, hospital stay and the fusion rate (over 90%). The OLIF group showed slightly better VAS and ODI scores improvement. The incidence of perioperative complications of OLIF and LLIF was 26.7 and 27.8% respectively. Higher rates of nerve injury and psoas weakness (21.2%) were reported for LLIF, while higher rates of cage subsidence (5.1%), endplate damage (5.2%) and vascular injury (1.7%) were reported for OLIF. CONCLUSIONS:The two groups are similar in terms of radiographic outcomes, operative blood loss, operative time and the length of hospital stay. The OLIF group shows advantages in VAS and ODI scores improvement. Though the incidence of perioperative complications of OLIF and LLIF is similar, the incidence of main complications is significantly different.
| S-EPMC6894220 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The prepsoas lateral approach for spinal fusion, oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), is considered one of the minimally invasive spinal fusion methods and is gaining popularity due to improved outcomes with copious supporting evidence. To date, no publication has studied the various positions of the left hip in actual patients which might affect the retroperitoneal oblique corridor (ROC). The study aimed to find the relevancy of the left hip position and the size of ROC. METHODS:We recruited 40 consecutive patients who needed diagnostic MRI from the out-patient clinic. MRI scan from L2 to L5 was performed in the supine, right lateral decubitus with hip flexion, and right lateral decubitus with hip in a neutral position. The retroperitoneal oblique corridor (ROC) was measured at the intervertebral disc level and compared. RESULTS:ROC of the hip in neutral position was significantly larger than hip flexion in all levels (p <?0.05); there was no significant difference in the ROC among levels (p =?0.22). ROC seems to be largest at L2/3 followed by L3/4 and L4/5 respectively in all positions. CONCLUSIONS:The retroperitoneal oblique corridors of L2 to L5 were significantly increased when the hip is in the neutral position, while the psoas cross-sectional area and anterior thickness were minimized in this position. Surgeons might benefit from a neutral position of the left hip in the oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedure. In conclusion, the retroperitoneal oblique corridors of L2 to L5 were significantly increased when the hip is in the neutral position, while the psoas cross-sectional area and anterior thickness were minimized in this position. Surgeons might benefit from a neutral position of the left hip in the oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedure.
| S-EPMC7461341 | biostudies-literature